. @piersmorgan And again, I must correct you. .223, not .233.—
Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 12, 2013
Dana Loesch’s calling out of CNN’s “real journalist” Piers Morgan over his error in categorizing the caliber of the Bushmaster rifle used in the Sandy Hook massacre might seem petty, aside from two reasons. First, Morgan believes he’s fully qualified to determine what weapons American citizens should and should not be allowed to own. Second, he himself wastes no opportunity to call out his detractors on their spelling errors, like so:
If you don’t take the time to spell-check your tweets, you’re not worthy of addressing Morgan. Getting basic information about guns wrong? That’s not the point — just ban something, already.
It’s .223, but who cares about facts. Why not pivot to an attack on the character of your opponent? That almost worked on your show the other night.
Why yes, yes she is. And she’s not alone.
That’s good, because when it’s Morgan’s turn to respond to an argument, you have to be prepared to wait a while.
Ah, so rather than correct himself on the facts, Morgan would prefer to set up yet another straw man — if a gun isn’t defined as an “assault weapon,” you must believe it’s harmless. Got it.
Is this, at last, the “national conversation on guns” that everyone’s been calling for?
Accurately identifying firearms, and knowing the laws which already exist to restrict access to them (unless you’re a journalist, that is), is important in any honest debate. Perhaps that’s why this tweet from the official show feed, @PiersTonight, implying that fully automatic weapons were part of the gun control debate was quietly deleted.
How are we supposed to have an honest national conversation if you gun nuts won’t shut up and agree with everything we say?
Morgan did manage an apology to Loesch, sort of.
We weren’t aware that Loesch was a gun lobbyist, but that certainly sounds like an invitation to appear on Morgan’s show. In the meantime, Piers and his musket have been welcomed to the gun range.